Assessment Order Voided for Lack of Authorization under Andhra Pradesh VAT Act

The High Court of Andhra Pradesh set aside the assessment order passed by the first respondent under the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005 for the period April 1, 2006 to March 31, 2010, due to lack of valid authorization for assessment. The court remitted the matter back for fresh adjudication, emphasizing the need for proper opportunity to be given to the petitioner.

---

---

Issues:
The validity of the assessment order u/s Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005 for the period April 1, 2006 to March 31, 2010.

Validity of Assessment Order:
The petitioner, a registered VAT dealer, challenged the assessment order passed by the first respondent for the tax period April 1, 2006 to March 31, 2010 under the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005. The petitioner contended that the first respondent was not validly authorized to make the assessment, citing an authorization dated October 5, 2010 issued by the Deputy Commissioner (CT), Kurnool Division. The petitioner argued that the authorization was invalid as it delegated the discretion to assess to the first respondent instead of the Deputy Commissioner himself exercising the discretion after satisfaction based on the audit report. The learned Special Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes did not dispute the normative basis of the petitioner's contention, acknowledging that the discretion and authority for assessment should lie with the Deputy Commissioner (CT), Kurnool Division, as per the decision in Sri Balaji Flour Mills [2011] 40 VST 150 (AP). The court set aside the assessment order and remitted the matter back for fresh adjudication, following the principles laid down in S.R. Kalani [1965] 16 STC 756 (MP); [2004] 3 STJ 282 (MP).

Conclusion:
The High Court of Andhra Pradesh set aside the assessment order passed by the first respondent under the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005 for the period April 1, 2006 to March 31, 2010, due to lack of valid authorization for assessment. The court remitted the matter back for fresh adjudication, emphasizing the need for proper opportunity to be given to the petitioner. The writ petition was finally disposed of with no order as to costs.

---